Beyond Therapy: Biotechnology and the Pursuit of Happiness

Hello. GD is “For long-running discussions of the great questions of our time.” I’m not interested in having a hellfire debate, but would like to hear your thoughts on this government website, http://www.bioethics.gov, and wanted to bring it to your attention.

The title of this thread is the title of Chapter 1 of the site, but I will post here the letter to the President of the United States for you to read (no copyright on most .gov sites so it’s ok). It is a very balanced letter, but if the title does not make you shiver in your deepest deep I don’t know what will. This is really scary. Also for your consideration I will post a link to two statements made to the UN General Assembly by representatives of the US that outline our exact and official position on reproductive and therapeutic cloning. The first is by Susan Moore, and the second is by Carolyn Willson.

I do not share the POTUS’ conservative moral values, but I honestly do feel that as fast as we are learning, that at some point we need to put on the brakes and take a deep look at what is happening to humanity. Many consider the idea of a technological singularity to be a joke, but the idea is very valid.

Do we know exactly what is happening to us and are we properly capable of understanding the implications it is going to have on our lives and the lives of humans in the future? Are we able to balance the morality of our actions today with new information that we might literally gain tomorrow? I don’t believe that we do, that we can, and I believe that we need to slow down.

Perhaps a very important and convincing contrast to this position is the strong face that Christopher Reeve put on for the world to see. He deserved the right to the pursuit of happiness and was held back only by his bodies’ limitations. But isn’t being held back by your bodies’ limitations the human condition? If you remove this condition, what is humanity?

-Alterego

That letter tries very hard to push all the right buttons, doesn’t it?
Especially: "It envisions a society in which more and more people are able to realize the American dream of liberty, prosperity, and justice for all."
I’m not really clear as to how this assumption is made. How are liberty and justice affected by bioenhancement?
And surely prosperity is relative. This enhancement will only make a beneficiary more prosperous if there are those that have not been enhanced and obviously this technology is going to cost, so it will be of benefit to the rich first and foremost.
I don’t doubt there are many benefits to this science but am less than convinced it will be used for altruistic purposes.

Some of the language in that letter is positively Nietzschean: “*a creature “in-between,” neither god nor beast, neither dumb body nor disembodied soul, but as a puzzling, upward-pointing unity of psyche and soma *” could have come straight from Thus Spake Zarathustra.

As for the (Zara-?) thrust of the letter:

There is no big deal in anything here IMO - we do most of these things to some extent already, in addition to allowing parents to instill their children with all kinds of mumbo jumbo which might be detrimental to their future happiness.

So long as some kind of precautionary principle is complied with and we continually ask ourselves whether our actions are causing suffering, I see no imminent “singularity” (and this seems to me to be a terrible choice of terminology).

Let’s try and prevent people starving, killing each other and dying of preventable conditions before we start preventing parents who want an intelligent, athletic baby girl pay a fortune to slightly increase the probability of having an intelligent, athletic baby girl.